Skip to comments.Sarah Palin A Distraction For The Left In 2010
Posted on 02/14/2010 10:45:56 AM PST by euram
I like Sarah Palin. Although I am not sure as to whether she has the capability of winning a Presidential election or not, I can say this without any reservation for those who think she is not qualified or capable of becoming President. She is eminently more qualified than the one who now holds the office and displays much more sense and understanding of the people than Barack Obama ever dreamed.
In fact her ability to connect with the people is one of her most endearing qualities and that is one of the main reasons she angers the left as she does. This combined with the fact that this gun toting, pro-life, woman who is also a loving mother does not meet the lefts definition of the, liberated, career minded, abortion favoring idea of what a woman should be.
This has placed Sarah Palin in a unique position as far as American politics is concerned. She is very polarizing which in most instances is the doom for a politician who seeks higher office especially the Presidency. But many polls have seen favorable numbers for her in 2012. But as I mentioned earlier, at least in light of the current political climate, I do not believe Palin can be elected President if she were to choose to run in 2012.
But whether she runs or not she is sparking debate that needs to be discussed, calling it like it is in reference to Obama policy and the direction that he and the Democrats are leading the country and generally making waves in places that irritates and distracts the Democrats in this all important mid term election year of 2010.
The left, especially those in the Pravda Obama loving media tend to focus on Sarah Palin much more than they should in an off Presidential year election. This focus on her and 2012 has become a major distraction of the left and the ever present probability that Democrats are going to get their tails handed to them in November because of the anger of the American people toward their policy and their irresponsible spending.
Everyone from Obama, and his Court Jester press secretary Robert Gibbs to many in Congress and the left wing media spend a great deal of time either commenting on or discussing Sarah Palin and especially what she has to say about the leftist agenda of Democrats. Much of what they say is in the form of personal attacks against her, but their focus on her and her possibilities in 2012 show that they see her as a threat and this makes her a distraction which takes their focus off of 2010 to a certain extent which is good. It only helps to reinforce their own sense of denial that the people are fed up with them and likely to boot them out in November.
Yet Democrats are very deceptive and use every means in their deceiving arsenal to trick the American people. Their tricks have time and again caused Americans especially those who are not prone to follow politics, into falling for their deception and the traps that they set which have consistently taken us down the road we are on and brought us to the brink of the Obama socialism that we are fighting today. Yes, the GOP has been an all to willing assistant in this process but the lions share of the socialist slide rests with Democrats.
This deception which is a key element of Democrat politics may also be part of the reason that the left is focusing so much on Sarah Palin. Their focus on her and 2012, while good in light of the attention it takes off of their losing in 2010 and their denial of that loss can also be used as a tool on their part to take the focus off of the all important Congressional elections and move the minds of the American people away from 2010 and looking rather toward 2012 and the Presidency only.
The Tea Party movement and the anger of the people is drawing a great deal of attention on the failings of the Obama administration and the liberal Congress of Pelosi and Reid. But if you pay close attention to much of the coverage of the anger and the Tea Parties, the focus is quickly shifted toward Palin and how polarizing she is and her possible quest for 2012. Thus taking the coverage of the present day anger off of the 2010 elections and placing on 2012.
Those of us who are politically savvy and watch closely what is taking place are not going to fall into trap set by the left to take the focus off of 2010. But many in John Q public can if we are not careful and in like manner spend too much time discussing 2012 and the Presidential election and not focusing singularly on the first obstacle in defeating the socialist agenda and that is cleaning house in 2010.
2012 is still much to far away for there to be so much focus on who will run for President and what candidate is most viable for the GOP nomination. Even the discussion of a third party alternative, which will guarantee an Obama victory, is much too early in light of the importance of the 2010 mid terms. There is far too much discussion is conservative circles like talk radio and even on many of the blogs about 2012, when the singular focus must be 2010.
Sure an occasional foray into 2012 possibilities is fine but far too much focus on 2012 is taking place and it has become a distraction to the mid term elections. Most Americans are tired of listening to politics and if too much time is spent on an election which is still nearly three years away the very short term interest of most Americans will quickly be turned off and the great house cleaning that most of us are wanting may be only a few seat change due to lack of voter turn out as a result of faded interest.
We must be careful not to allow ourselves to fall for the Democrat 2012 distraction whether it is because of their denial over a 2010 loss or an intentional push to take the focus off of the mid terms. While 2012 will be important in order to boot Obama out, 2010 in many ways has a higher importance because if we do not clean house in a way that will tie Obamas hands for the remainder of his one term Presidency, then there may not be a country left to save come 2012.
The talk about Sarah Palin is good and if the distraction she is causing on the left takes their focus off of the mid terms and enforces their denial in losing the House and the Senate then let them continue to focus on her and her Presidential aspirations. But we who know the score and understand fully the ramifications of the 2010 elections and must set a straight and narrow course to defeating both Democrats and RINOS and taking the Congress back from the socialists who control it now.
Though there has been much focus on Palin and 2012, she understands the necessity of 2010 and when she is interviewed or making a speech her focus is on the mid terms with short forays into 2012. Let the left look toward 2012. Let them use their deception as they always have, but we must remain focused on the first hurdle and that is this years election. Keeping that focus and telling the truth to the American people will bring about what we need and desire for the survival of our Republic. Once that is attained in November, THEN we can focus on 2012 and sending Obama to an early retirement.
Ken Taylor The Liberal Lie, The Conservative Truth
It’s hard to say what the writer was trying to get at.....I get it then i read it again and miss it completely..
Sarah Palin nails the Left and Obama in particular, along with his agenda while she unselfishly and vigorously carries the conservative message throughout our country attracting crowds where ever she goes.
God Bless Sarah Palin!
By 2014 we’ll have it figured out.
I’m right with you on that, Bigtigermike. She’s carrying our conservative message where ever she goes and she’s speaking to crowds larger than anyone else could even dream of attracting!
“But as I mentioned earlier, at least in light of the current political climate, I do not believe Palin can be elected President if she were to choose to run in 2012.”
What exactly qualifies this self appointed pundit to make such a judgment. Let me tell Mr. Ken Taylor, whoever he is, one thing. I heard the same bilge spewed about Regan vis a vis Ford and Bush, two consummate losers. It was garbage then and is garbage now. Reagan was sooooo polarizing (sarc). Until he won back to back landslides as the most conservative candidate in my lifetime.
Let me put it to him and anyone else who believes this nonsense, IF (and and say If) SARAH PALIN CANNOT BE ELECTED in 2012, THEN NONE OF THE LAME GOP CANDIDATES CAN BE. Anyone who can’t see that is either blind or on someone’s payroll. She is the only one who (like Reagan) can put across a landslide. the rest, if they managed to win, would do so like Bush 43, that is: by the skin of their teeth.
I think he’s taking the long way around saying that Palin is being such a distraction that the dems are losing track of the midterms. I think there is something to that. The DNC, DSCC, etc., have all sent out emails using Palin to scare people into donating money, I see more dems yapping about Palin than even talking about the midterms. As far as I can see Palin is doing an excellent job at both distracting the dems, and helping the repubs to focus on 2010.
Similarly, I don't think the aroused electorate is going to forget what they have witnessed the last year or so, just because media flunkies want to dwell on Palin.
I don’t think for a moment that us rubes have somehow forgotten the importance of cleaning house in 2010.
And I don’t think being a fan of Sarah counts a mindless adulation.
The libs obsession, on the other hand, is truly a distraction for them.
I was amazed that even PBS carried her Tea Party speech. Howmuchyoowannabet more Dems watched her speech than they did Obama’s SOTU?
And im glad that Sarah has repeatedly said that her focus is 2010.....thank God!
Edwards is photogenic. Sarah Palin is photogenic. Ergo . . . .
To wit, Ian Punnett week-end host on the most popular night time show in America -- regardless what you think of CoastToCoastAM it attracts millions -- juxtaposed the two for comparison. They are alike, they both lie -- though he avoided the usual lefty, state controlled American media (SCAM) declaration, Palin is a dumb b****.
See how fair and unbiased it can sound?
“Their focus on her and 2012, while good in light of the attention it takes off of their losing in 2010 and their denial of that loss can also be used as a tool on their part to take the focus off of the all important Congressional elections and move the minds of the American people away from 2010 and looking rather toward 2012 and the Presidency only.”
His whole premise is based on a false alternative, that is: that the left is focusing on her instead of their 2010 peril. She is in large measure the reason for their peril given that her charisma and political skill, not to mention the fact that she is de facto leader of the Tea Party Movement. They have to attack her whether for 2010 or 2012. She ain’t going away.
I will continue to dream about my dream ticket for 2012!
ALLEN WEST/SARAH PALIN
Then just watch the nonsense stop and our country become the strongest, Constitutional Republic in the world!
Let me give you an analogy of what most people are missing about Palin vs Obama. Suppose you have two football teams, one is superior to the other. On any given Sunday the superior team should always prevail, but occasionally the underdog pulls the upset, and the primary reason the upset occur is that the superior team DOES NOT PERFORM UP TO EXPECTATIONS (drop passes, too many untimely penalties, not picking up first downs of 3rd down and 2)or turns the ball over too often.
Obama is clearly in a superior position because he is now POTUS, the incumbent and has the trappings of office. Whether the Messiah is elected or not in 2012 is mostly up to him and not Palin. I know for Palin supporters, I am one, that is a hard concept to grasp but if Obama is polling over 51% with voters in job approval going into the fall 2012 campaign, history tells you it is game, set and match for Obama, especially with the MSM fully in his corner, and thus Palin most likely will not topple Obama. The only chance Palin has is if Obama is polling below 51% and in the low or high 40’s. In that scenario anything can happen and 3rd party performances could become a significant factor to the final electoral college outcome.
So when Erickson claims in this climate that Palin cannot be clected in 2012, he, imho, puts too much onus on Palin and not enough on Obama’s political viability in 2012. Of course Palin will do everything within her power before fall 2012 to keep the Messiah’s poll numbers down, but again in the final analysis, whoever the GOP nomimee is, it will depend more on the political fortunes of Obama than anything else which will determine the outcome of the 2012 presidential election.
I liked her before liking her was cool, but I want to see how many Republicans she can help get elected in ‘10. If she has Obama-sized coattails, then I’ll have issues with her.
It would be smart to not let the media decide who the Republican Presidential candidate will be.
If it is not Sarah Palin, the media wins again. They gave $800 million of free propaganda to Zero. Ronald Reagan could not have won and his poll numbers would be where Sarah's are today if they did to Reagan what they are doing to her. Remember how McCain's numbers were so good until he was running against Zero! The media manipulated the election and the polls.
We would be wise to take back the media by going around them and not letting them dictate our nominee.
We could strike a blow to them once and for all by doing all we can to get Sarah elected!!
The biggest reason they hate Sarah are her Pro Life Stand and her Christian faith which she doesn't hide.
Sarah Palin should Listen to Lynn Cheney every chance she Gets,would not hurt one bit.
I am talking about an average of a series of polls and not on one specific poll. Obviously polls can be manipulated but if 10 polls show Obama between 44-47% and one is at 52% you can conclude that the Messiah is vulnerable.
“Whether the Messiah is elected or not in 2012 is mostly up to him and not Palin.”
I have been saying exactly the same thing. You are quite correct. It is more LIKELY than not(though not certain, for reasons I outline below)that if Obama is over 50% in November 2012, he wins against any Republican. If he is in the low 40s or worse, he loses against any Republican (assuming there is no third party).
I believe that Obama will be the issue in 2012, and I believe that his policies will already have taken their toll and that his poll numbers will be abysmal. The American people will fire Obama and the GOP nominee will be the beneficiary.
But...if Obama comes back, aided by a GOP Congress that forces a measure of sanity on him, he could still be beaten, although I would admit it would be much harder. However, a conventional RINO (Bob Dole style) would not be able to do it. To beat Obama if his poll numbers were over 50 (or right at 50) would require two things to happen, both of which Palin achieve:
1)TURN HIS FLANK: By that I mean, appeal to senior citizens, a Democratic core constituency, that is ripe for the picking, based upon his health care rationing scheme that Palin so pithily characterized as “death panels”. Having struck the scheme a mortal blow, she has unique appeal with this constituency and this huge voting bloc comes right out of Obama’s hide. Practically every senior vote for her is a take away from him. And the seniors vote far more in proportion to their numbers. They will not turn to Romney, for example, who has no credibility on this issue and would likely put across some kind of ObamaCare-lite based on his MassCare fiasco. If Mitt got the nod, the seniors would either stick with Obama or not vote at all. Ditto the rest of the RNINO backbenchers.
2)THE ENTHUSIASM (Charisma) GAP- Second, Palin’s nomination would energize turnout not just among GOPers and Tea Partiers, but across the board among conservatives, who are far and away the largest plurality in the country. For the reason why, let me go back to 1980. Had G.W. Bush been nominated instead of Reagan, it is likely, but not certain, that he would have beaten Carter. But everyone would agree, I think, that with Bush at the top of the ticket, it would have been much closer. Instead of 51-41, it might have been closer to 45-43. John Anderson’s presence in the race or additional candidates from the right might have tipped it to Carter. The reason it was not close is that Reagan was a GREAT candidate, who appealed to blue collar Dems (the 1980 counterparts of the Tea Party people). Palin has the same common (populist) touch, and it is worth several percentage points. If it is a dead even race, her charisma and appeal to disaffected voters could pull it out.
In a close race, the better candidate usually wins, as Kennedy did in 1960 and Bush(who was marginally better than Kerry) did in 2004. If the Dems had nominated Edwards(who had great political skills, in spite of his yet to be revealed abysmal character) in 2004, Bush likely would have lost.
Palin’s daring, genius and moxie, not to mention her stunning good looks and ease in front of the camera, would keep the GOP in the game even if somehow Obama was over 50%. Plus she would work him over in the debates.
None of the other GOP candidates can deliver on these two essential ingredients to victory in 2012. Only Sarah Palin can.
Ping to Post 20 re two historical reasons Sarah Palin is the best candidate the GOP could field.
Patently false. I voted for Ronald Reagan, but I will not willingly vote for Sarah Palin.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.